Identifying the real views and values of a politician is never easy.    Voter perceptions may not reflect the reality of a politician’s views and changing events may alter a politician’s  previously held views.  Voters who judge a politician’s views as extreme are indicating the extent to which the politician’s views differ from their own and, by inference, the likelihood of voting for that politician.

An interesting new poll from Rasmussen Reports reveals that the politician considered to have the most extreme views by 55% of voters is  Sarah Palin.

Other results of the poll show that:

• 48% of voters view President Obama’s views as extreme.
• 35% of voters view Secretary of State Clinton’s view as extreme and 51% see her as mainstream.
• 57% of voters view the congressional agenda as extreme.
• 81% of liberals see Obama as mainstream, while 75% of conservatives see him as extreme.

Not surprisingly, with the economy weakening and the unemployment rate remaining in double digits, 65% of voters are at least somewhat angry at the policies of the Federal Government.   Unless things improve quickly, voters are likely to be in a surly mood come election time.

Rasmussen Reports, one of the most respected and accurate polling organizations in the country, now provides proof of what many of us have long known - the vast majority of Americans do not believe that the federal government has the consent of the governed.

The notion that governments derive their only just authority from the consent of the governed is a foundational principle of the American experiment.

However, a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 23% of voters nationwide believe the federal government today has the consent of the governed. Sixty-two percent (62%) say it does not, and 15% are not sure.

In his new book, In Search of Self-Governance, Scott Rasmussen observes that the American people are “united in the belief that our political system is broken, that politicians are corrupt and that neither major political party has the answers.” He adds that “the gap between Americans who want to govern themselves and the politicians who want to rule over them may be as big today as the gap between the colonies and England during the 18th century.”

The book earned positive reviews from Larry Sabato, Pat Caddell, Bill Kristol, Joe Trippi and others. In Search of Self-Governance is available from Rasmussen Reports and at Amazon.com.

The growing disconnect between mainstream America and the ruling political elite has been discussed on this site numerous times and now we have the polling numbers to prove it.  Despite the polls, Washington carries on with business as usual, apparently oblivious to the concerns, beliefs and values of their constituents.  Additional polls reinforce the basic disconnect between mainstream voters and the ruling elite.

Data released yesterday finds that 68% of voters believe the Political Class doesn’t care what most Americans think.

Over the past couple of years, most Americans have opposed many initiatives of the Political Class including the bailouts of the financial and auto industries. Additionally, most voters still favor repeal of the national health care plan and overwhelmingly disagree with the Justice Department’s decision to challenge Arizona’s new immigration law in court.

Fifty-five percent (55%) don’t even think most members of Congress pay all the taxes they owe.

Voters are evenly divided over the notion that a group of people randomly selected from the phone book could do a better job than the current Congress.

One reason for skepticism about the Political Class is that 70% believe Big Government and Big Business are on the same team working together against the rest of us.

In a recent Wall Street Journal article, Scott Rasmussen, founder of Rasmussen Reports further expounded on the serious rift between the governed and the ruling elite.

“Americans don’t want to be governed from the left or the right,” Scott Rasmussen tells the American Legislative Exchange Council, a conference of 1,500 conservative and moderate legislators. “They want, like the Founding Fathers, to largely govern themselves with Washington in a supporting—but not dominant—role. The tea party movement is today’s updated expression of that sentiment.”

A majority of Democrats, Republicans and independents all agree with the mainstream view on Mr. Rasmussen’s three questions. “The major division in this country is no longer between parties but between political elites and the people,” Mr. Rasmussen says. His recent polls show huge gaps between the two groups. While 67% of the political class believes the U.S. is moving in the right direction, a full 84% of mainstream voters believe the nation is moving in the wrong one.

The fact that 67% of the ruling political elite believe we are moving in the right direction despite the totally opposite belief by those they rule over should be a cause of great concern regarding the future political stability of the country.  The ruling elite will continue to enforce their “enlightened view” upon an unwilling populace until they are voted out of office.  Since Democrats and Republicans both seem to be largely woven out of the same cloth, the question of whether any fundamental change will occur remains open.

Baseball great, 48 year old Roger Clemens, faces the equivalent of a death sentence with the threat of a 30 year prison term after being indicted for making false statements, obstruction and felony perjury.   The indictment follows an inquiry into Mr. Clemen’s alleged use of steroids, during which Mr. Clemens flatly denied ever using steroids or human growth hormone.

Federal prosecutors, miffed by Mr. Clemens audacity to make allegedly “false statements under oath”, announced the indictment today and seem prepared to vigorously prosecute Mr. Clemens.  US Attorney Ronald Machen, said in a statement that “The Department of Justice takes referrals from congressional committees very seriously”.

Mr. Clemens continues to maintain his innocence, stating on Twitter that, “I never took HGH or steroids.  And I did not lie to Congress. I look forward to challenging the government’s accusations, and hope people will keep an open mind until trial. I appreciate all the support I have been getting. I am happy to finally have my day in court.”

The ironic part of this human tragedy is that Roger Clemens was man enough to state his innocence, forgoing his Fifth Amendment rights and agreeing to testify before Congress.  According to sports writer Jeff Passan,

Clemens wasn’t in trouble when baseball released George Mitchell’s report on steroid use. Sure, it disintegrated the purity of everything he spent 24 seasons building, but Clemens was no felon. Just a guy who chose the wrong drug dealer. Only when he went on the warpath to prove his innocence did Clemens tiptoe near a law that people in power are interested in prosecuting.

The indictment, 19 pages long and rich with information, highlights 15 utterances the government deemed false leading to an obstruction of justice charge. Testimony regarding steroids, HGH and vitamin B12 comprise three false statement charges and two more perjury charges, each of which could carry five years prison time.

On page 10 is the statement most horrifying to Clemens, the rubbing alcohol in his gaping wound: “The Committee did not issue CLEMENS a subpoena, and CLEMENS was under no obligation to testify. CLEMENS retained his right under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution to refuse to answer any questions that might tend to incriminate him.”

He could’ve taken the Mark McGwire tack, treating the Fifth like his best friend. He could’ve done what so many other accused steroid users did: not say a thing and let the allegations fade into the ether, a black mark, sure, but not one that torpedoes a life. He could’ve done what his friend Andy Pettitte did: admit use, apologize for it and move on.

There remains the possibility, of course, that Clemens never did use steroids,…

Still, it’s harrowing to see another all-time great baseball player, steroids or not, paraded in front of the country as an example that thou best not trifle with the feds.

Does the country really want to see Roger Clemens put in jail, made an example of, by over zealous prosecutors seeking to exhibit the Federal Government’s stern authority over its citizens?  Readers of this column are already aware of the fact that the United States incarcerates more of its citizens than any country on earth -see How The US Justice System Turns Jaywalkers Into Violent Criminals.

The United States currently has in prison 762 people per 100,000.   The incarceration rate in France is 96 people per 100,000.   Is the United States a land full of criminals or do we have a justice system run amok??  People lie everyday, including those who lead our country.   Doesn’t the Justice Department have better things to do?

The Alien Amongst Us

Two years into his presidency Mr. Obama seems unable to connect with the average American on something as fundamental as his birthplace and religious beliefs.  According to Pew Research, an overwhelming number of Americans (61%) either don’t know what religion he follows or believe that he is a Muslim.  Mr. Obama’s disconnect to the average American has been noted previously, as reflected by his plunge in approval ratings (see Obama’s Approval Ratings Plunge).

The poll on Mr. Obama’s religion was conducted prior to his recent strong endorsement for building a mosque on Ground Zero in Manhattan, leading to the expectation that future polls will show further confusion about the President’s core beliefs and background.  Mr. Kohut, president of Pew Research, stated that “People have told us consistently that they want religious politicians.  I think it’s an important element of how people see him, how he’s viewed personally.”

Doubts On Obama's Fundamental Beliefs

Where Was The President Born?

Another indication of the President’s lack of credibility with the public are CNN poll results that show a startling 27% of Americans doubt that Mr. Obama was born in the United States.  Questions regarding Mr. Obama’s birthplace persist despite the posting of Obama’s birth certificate on the Internet  by his staff during the election campaign.  Mr. Obama’s recent strong support for a Muslim mosque to be built next to Ground Zero victims in Manhattan is only likely to enhance the public perception that Mr. Obama’s views are alien to American culture.

The public doubts on Mr. Obama’s birthplace and religion may be completely misguided, but speaks volumes for Mr. Obama’s inability to honestly let us know who he is and what he actually believes in.  In the final analysis, Mr. Obama’s fundamental problem is the fact that the public is beginning to feel extremely uncomfortable about their President.

It should come as no surprise that the President strongly endorsed building a mosque on Ground Zero in Manhattan.  Nor should it come as a surprise that he later tried to backpedal and obfuscate his original defense of the mosque when various groups expressed outrage at his position.  Perhaps the President is merely trying to tell every side what they want to hear - perhaps worse, he simply lacks any real convictions on the matter due to the absence of a core set of values or beliefs.

James Taranto of Wall Street Journal gives a great critical summation of the back and forth retractions issued by the White House after Mr. Obama’s original endorsement of the mosque, and concludes that Mr. Obama “is a stubborn man without conviction”.  Mr. Taranto’s analysis is definitely worth the read - excerpts from his article follow:

So why did nearly everybody construe the Friday remarks as a strong endorsement of the Ground Zero mosque? Blame the professional left, which, in its characteristic neo-McCarthyite style, has sought to portray all criticism of the mosque project as, to quote Sargent, “un-American” and the critics as an undifferentiated lunatic fringe that rejects the First Amendment, at least as it applies to Islam.

Obama is a man of the left, so when he deployed the left’s rhetoric about the First Amendment, allies and adversaries alike assumed that he also intended to level this accusation at the mosque’s critics. They might well have been right about this, but if so, the president quickly made clear he does not have the courage of his convictions.

In doing so, and despite himself, he managed to make an important point. It is not a “clever little dodge” but a principled position to say that while the mosque’s developers have a right to build it near Ground Zero, doing so is not the right thing to do. Freedom of religion does not mean freedom from criticism.

Obama, however, made this point in a way that showed him to be small and weak, offering it not as a defense of the mosque’s critics but of himself against them. Imagine if on Friday he had not only pandered to his guests by defending their constitutional rights but also challenged them by saying forthrightly what he acknowledged evasively on Saturday: that building a mosque near Ground Zero may be unwise even though the law clearly allows it. That would have been presidential.

Instead we got what sounded like a strong endorsement, followed by a backpedaling denial that it was any such thing, followed in turn by a denial that the earlier denial was backpedaling. The president stands behind everything he said but denies that he said much of anything.

Barack Obama is a stubborn man without conviction.

Once again the President has shown a mindset that is alien to the common sense values of the average American.  Even worse, our accidental President was not shown the capacity to listen or learn even as his poll number plummet.

More On This Topic:  Sacrilege at Ground Zero - Washington Post

Location matters. Especially this location. Ground Zero is the site of the greatest mass murder in American history — perpetrated by Muslims of a particular Islamist orthodoxy in whose cause they died and in whose name they killed.

America is a free country where you can build whatever you want — but not anywhere. That’s why we have zoning laws. No liquor store near a school, no strip malls where they offend local sensibilities, and, if your house doesn’t meet community architectural codes, you cannot build at all.

These restrictions are for reasons of aesthetics. Others are for more profound reasons of common decency and respect for the sacred. No commercial tower over Gettysburg, no convent at Auschwitz — and no mosque at Ground Zero.

Build it anywhere but there.